saturn’s f ring core: calm in the midst of...

Saturn’s F Ring Core: Calm in the midst of chaos

Part 2

J. Cuzzi, E. Marouf, R. C. French, and R. Jacobson

Saturn’s F Ring Core: Calm in the midst of chaos

Part 2

J. Cuzzi, E. Marouf, R. C. French, and R. Jacobson

How can this be, in the face of pervasive orbital chaos??

The F ring core is very narrow (<1km from occultations; Marouf et al 1986; 2011a,b),

It contains numerous sizeable embedded objects (Murray et al 2008, Esposito et al 2008, Beurle et al 2010),

and it has maintained a very stable orbit over decades (Bosh+2002, Marouf+2011a,b, Albers+2012, Cooper+2012).

Radius relative to mean elliptical orbit

360o of orbit longitude

Orbital chaos is pervasive (Scargle et al 1993, Winter et al 2007, 2010)

Δa (km)

“…all particles in core region are chaotic”; most

extreme case shown.

ISS continues to have trouble tracking objects

(Cooper et al 2006)

Pr Pa

Log

Res

onan

ce s

treng

th

F Ring region is filled by closely spaced resonances

130000 135000 140000 145000 150000

140500 140000 141000

years years 0 20 9.5 10.5

1st 2nd

140221

F Ring core region

a arms

Cuzzi, Whizin, Hogan, Dobrovolskis, Dones, Showalter, Colwell, Scargle 2014

Δa=10m

Prom-F differential prec period

90km

F Ring core (140221: Albers, Cooper)

Cuzzi et al 2014

ti

Showalter & Burns 1982 20

-20 km

Close/eccentric encounters change semimajor axis and synodic period.

Subsequent encounters generally lead to chaotic diffusion of a -

unless canceled immediately, on next encounter after Psyn. We call orbits where this occurs “antiresonances”.

Merge (e, ) of particle and perturber

Δa ~ few km

Perturbation by Prometheus impulses

antialignment

Cuzzi et al 2014

time t t + (m±1/2)Ps

If , cancellation at antiresonance when Stable locations are halfway between resonances

Simple case

time t t + (m±1/2)Ps

If , cancellation at antiresonance when Stable locations are halfway between resonances

Simple case

Actual case time t t + mPs

Now we obtain cancellation when

And because , get “antiresonances” where ,

That is, at or near resonances, not halfway between them Cuzzi et al 2014

-180 -90 0 90 180

Δa

0,2,4,… 1,3,5,…

(35 yrs) Insets adapted from Beurle et al 2010

This works fine when perturbations are weak, in sinusoidal limit, and can be canceled by encounters differing by 180 deg in longitude

-180 -90 0 90 180

Δa

0,2,4,… 1,3,5,…

Δa

:

-180 -90 0 90 180

Δa

0,2,4,… 1,3,5,…

Δa

:

To preserve the long-term stability possible at AR’s, particles can never encounter Prometheus when it is near its apoapse………..

Suggests that corotational resonance acts to select/maintain long-term stable longitudes wrt Prometheus.

Goldreich et al 1986 Porco 1991

Neptune’s arcs are confined by torques in a 2m-fold CIR (inclination type; m=86, due to the very low eccentricity of Galatea), with energy input from the Galatea m=43 ILR. For Prometheus, the CER (eccentricity type) dominates.

Pa

OLR CER

AR 109:108

0.08 km

Resonance locations near the F Ring

Log

torq

ue

RSS sees a different F Ring core Marouf et al. 2011 a,b

  RSS core ~0.1-1km wide, vs ISS/UVIS/VIMS “core” tens of km

 Comparable optical depth at K, X, S bands (> few cm radius)

  Not always detected! (15 of 49 in 2011; 24 of 67 to date)

Esposito et al 2008

1986

Are the RSS occultations consistent with CR idea?

•  Start with inertial longitudes of 23 Cassini RSS detections, VGR1 RSS detection, and 43 Cassini RSS nondetections. No discrimination by optical depth of detection.

•  Regress to some epoch on comb of candidate mean motions for m=110 CER, varying nPr in fractional steps of 5E-7 (0.07km), and then fold resulting longitudes mod (360/110)o.

•  Look for clustering in a restricted range of folded longitudes near (regressed and folded) Prometheus periapse and away from its apoapse. Use Jacobson’s avg. value for Prometheus apse precession, starting with longitude of Cooper et al (2012).

F03

n1

n2

Panels show regressed and folded

longitudes of RSS detections

assuming F Ring Core

at m=110 CER, by stepping Prometheus mean motion

in steps of Δn/n=5E-7

peri apo

F03

n1

n2

peri apo

Panels show regressed and folded

longitudes of RSS detections

assuming F Ring Core

at m=110 CER, by stepping Prometheus mean motion

in steps of Δn/n=5E-7

Uncertainty and variability in Prometheus’ orbit

n

a

Open circles: RSS nondetections

apo peri

ARs and CERs are always very close to OLRs - within 1km across the entire region

CERs always inside OLRs, asymptotically overlapping; ARs sometimes inside, sometimes outside

Hard to tell from SMA-residuals which is actually responsible for stable zones (“stalactites”).

However, there is only one place where the AR and CER exactly coincide. . . . . .

Relative offset between (ARs, CERs) and OLRs

…..exactly where the F Ring core lies (140222.4km)!

It cannot be a coincidence that the F Ring core lies in the only place in the entire F Ring region where the AR and the CER exactly coincide.

Most likely, both AR and CER are required for long term stability.

Relative offset between (ARs, CERs) and OLRs

Summary

F Ring core must be able to track these small modifications to the orbit of Prometheus in order to maintain long-term stability. Stable sites act as “attractors” for wayward particles, perhaps allowing this to happen.

F Ring stability is due to a combination of “antiresonance” (AR) associated with Prometheus’ m=109 OLR, and its m=110 CER. AR is the result of rapid precession of Prom apse, and the long synodic period between Prometheus and an F Ring particle.

F Ring SMA = 140222.4 +/- 0.1 km from 2005-2013 at least; however, it must “breathe” over time as Prometheus orbit varies.

Some dramatic change in Prometheus’ (and Pandora’s) orbits in early 2013 has disturbed the pattern of stable sites. Stable sites may be concentrated in three longitudinal segments.